Cop Draws Gun at Tweetup Snowball Fight; Is It So Clear-Cut?

While it’s easy for us to predict the decline, and ultimate death of mainstream media, I wonder if we know what we’re letting ourselves in for. Take, for example, the recent incident that involved a Washington D.C. detective and a “tweetup” snowball fight.

Mashable alerted me to the story. With a couple of pics and a video, it’s easy to believe that the cop overreacted and should lose his job:

Now, I’m certainly not bashing Mashable here–they took the social media angle that appealed to their readers–but let’s look at the “citizen journalism” side of this. Viewing the photographs and cell phone video, you might confidently predict that there’s not much the police officer can say to defend his actions.

He pulled a gun on a bunch of kids having a snowball fight!

But, if you take the time to read the Washington Post’s lengthy account of the incident, and you learn that this was, at worse, a misunderstanding and, at best, the correct reaction for a cop being pummeled with snowballs.

Personally, I still believe the cop overreacted–and should face some kind of discipline–but that’s part of my point. I’m a citizen journalist–aka blogger–and I make my living by imparting my subjective views on you, our readers. The Washington Post however, while not able to shake completely the latent bias of its journalists, does a much better job of presenting the facts–and leaving the reader to form their own opinion.

In Radically Transparent, we talk about “professional detractors”–those that are paid to report on your misfortune, yet without any apparent modus operandi–such as journalists. While we may not like what they write about us, we know that we can somewhat trust their structured gathering of information and procedures for correcting any erroneous reporting.

As citizen journalism continues to take the place of professional journalism, I wonder how this will affect reputation management. Are we ready for a world of biased reporting?

I’d love to hear your thoughts!

AT&T Activates Citizen-Shills to Oppose Net Neutrality

Is there a fine line between “rallying the troops” and “astroturfing?”

Well, if there is, AT&T will be our case study for the day, after an internal email–asking employees to oppose net neutrality–has surfaced.

It appears that proponents of net neutrality–and AT&T’s detractors–have jumped on a single line of the wordy memo:

We encourage you, your family and friends to join the voices telling the FCC not to regulate the Internet. It can be done through a personal email account by going to www.openinternet.gov and clicking on the “Join the Discussion” link.

The “done through a personal email account” part has been translated into “hide the fact that you are an AT&T employee” by many bloggers.

Others have jumped on the fact that AT&T is feeding soundbites to its thousands of employees–turning them into citizen-shills for the company.

Of course, AT&T’s not going to find many sympathetic bloggers–pretty much all are in favor of net neutrality–so it’s somewhat unfair to suggest that AT&T is doing something sinister. But, it does serve as a warning for those engaged in any kind of reputation management campaign. Time and time again I caution companies that even in “battle” they have to be ready for the consequences of their actions. Secret, internal emails ALWAYS leak out onto the web.

And, let’s be honest AT&T. You should already have built a culture that encourages brand evangelists within your company. Your employees should already be delighted to work for you, and they should already have a desire to promote and defend your company’s stance on many subjects–including net neutrality. The fact that you’ve felt compelled to send out this memo, suggests that you have deeper problems with your employee’s moral and happiness.

Want to improve your company’s external reputation? Focus first on building the reputation you have with your employees!

By a Show of Hands, Who Would Like 1,500 Brand Evangelists on Facebook?

Talk to me long enough about online reputation management and we’ll likely get to the topic of managing online reviews. I truly believe that more of your happy customers would be willing to post a positive review of your business, if only you’d ask!

Well, Empathica has launched a new Facebook application that does just that–encourages your raving fans to tell the world. Called GoRecommend, the app starts as a simply customer survey. Those that demonstrate a favorable experience with a business are prompted to share that positive feedback on Facebook.

Here’s how it looks:

I know it sounds somewhat “icky” but there’s a war going on with your online reputation–and many of you are losing. Your detractors don’t need any prompting to tell their Facebook friends about their dreadful experience with your business. Consider this your chance to level the playing field.

And GoRecommend appears to work!

Since testing GoRecommend, popular hamburger chain Red Robin has received more than 1,500 recommendations on Facebook! Who here would love just 150 positive recommendations–let alone 1,500?

Even if you don’t have the budget to utilize GoRecommend, let this be a wake-up call that you don’t get, if you don’t ask!

<img border="0" src="http://constanthit.com/wp-content/plugins/wp-o-matic/cache/787f4_vertical-leap-seo-234.gif”>

A Billion Reasons for Twitter to be Happy

So it looks like Twitter has entered some rarefied air for sure. According to ReadWriteWeb and TechCrunch the micro-blogging juggernaut is moving into an exclusive club by securing a new round of funding ($50 million) based on a valuation of $1 billion (yup, it’s a b). No doubt, this will begin to stir the supporters and detractors alike. Unless we have ridiculously short memories or just think that this time will be different one has to wonder how a company that no one can figure out revenue wise can be valued at that much.

While I am not an analyst I did think about staying at a Holiday Inn Express over the past year so I qualify for jumping into the fray, right? Let’s hear what the RWW folks had to say first though.

While it’s unlikely that Twitter CEO Evan Williams was wearing a Dr. Evil costume when he delivered the news, he had the pleasure of announcing his company’s $1 billion dollar valuation today at an all hands meeting. According to TechCrunch, the company has raised a $50 million dollar funding round and the money will be in the bank shortly. Given the fact that Twitter turned down an offer to be purchased by Facebook earlier in the year, it appears the two are about to tango.

So of course, this conversation wouldn’t be nearly as much fun without bringing Facebook into the mix. Facebook is starting to look almost like IBM compared to Twitter. What with actual revenue generation plans and actually having the audacity to be cash flow positive one begins to wonder if Facebook is going to actually merit its own valuation. As we mentioned yesterday, Master of the Universe, Mark Zuckerberg, has something to say in the Facebook blog.

We’re also succeeding at building Facebook in a sustainable way. Earlier this year, we said we expected to be cash flow positive sometime in 2010, and I’m pleased to share that we achieved this milestone last quarter. This is important to us because it sets Facebook up to be a strong independent service for the long term.

So is Twitter in for the long term? They certainly still have the buzz going and now there appears to be a a real Facebook faceoff looming for the foreseeable future.

In the past, ReadWriteWeb has looked at Twitter’s platform potential. The service has already been used to create meme trackers, emergency alert services, news feeds and brand monitoring tools. As the infrastructure and search have improved, Twitter has become the go-to site for real time media. But can the company make a Facebook-like leap?

Facebook has added Twitter like features so why not? So what’s your take? I bet there at least a billion opinions on this one.

<img border="0" src="http://constanthit.com/wp-content/plugins/wp-o-matic/cache/197ce_vertical-leap-seo-234.gif”>

Landmark Ruling: Judge Orders Google to Hand Over Identity of Anonymous Blogger

As an online reputation management consultant, I often find myself on both sides of the fence. Sure, I help a lot of companies and individuals with their reputation needs, but I also study and comment on the effectiveness of the different methods and tactics open to a brand’s detractors.

A new court ruling provides the perfect platform for discussing both sides of the fence.

As SMH reports, a US judge has ruled that Google must hand over the identity of an anonymous Blogger.com author that posted defamatory remarks about glamor model Liskula Cohen. In a series of attacks, the blogger behind “Skanks in NYC” made many disparaging remarks about Cohen, including:

“How old is this skank? 40 something? She’s a psychotic, lying, whoring, still going to clubs at her age, skank.”

The blogger’s attorney tried to claim that these remarks were not defamatory and merely one person’s opinion or “trash talk” as he called it. The judge didn’t buy it.

“The thrust of the blog is that the petitioner is a sexually promiscuous woman,” Judge Madden wrote in her judgment, noting that the comments were run alongside photos of Cohen in suggestive poses.

Now Google has to hand over the identity of the blogger so that Cohen can identify and sue that person for defamation. Whether she wins that or not, that’s for another judge to decide.

So, what are the lessons here?

First, for defamer. While defamatory laws (especially in the US) provide some means of protection for opinion, it often boils down to whether or not it’s portrayed as fact and if the general public will assume its a fact. If you go on the attack, you have to be sure the claims you are making are legitimate. You can’t just say “in my opinion” then reel off a laundry list of damaging statements.

Also, anonymity is coming to an end on the web. In my opinion, this is a good thing. I’ve seen too many companies have their reputation burned by an anonymous blogger–one that is just as likely to be a competitor fabricating lies, as a real customer. So, if you have plans to attack anyone’s reputation, don’t assume that you can do so in the safety of anonymity.

For the recipient. This could set an important precedent for using the legal system to weed out defamatory detractors. While this ruling is against Google, it is likely to become an important asset when asking any judge to force a web business to hand over the personal details of an anonymous detractor. If the most powerful internet company in the world can be forced to hand over the identity of a detractor, it stands to reason that any company can.

There are few times that I ever advise a client to take legal action, but blatant defamatory comments are certainly one of them. With this ruling–and if other judges follow suit–it will make it easier for businesses battling reputation issues. It’s one thing to stand-up and face legitimate criticisms of your business, but at least now there’s an option for exposing those that have less than genuine intentions.

The bottom line? I’ve spent the last half a decade touting the virtues of being Radically Transparent. It now looks like that transparency is going to be felt on both sides of the fence.

(via)